Review of Cosmopolis (2012) by Freeman M — 10 Sep 2013

Where should I start? Cosmopolis is an adaptation of novel written Don DeLillo which in theory and when taken separately from the dialogue has moments of real intelligence. But its seemed extremely difficult to fully grasp most of these "moments" as they flew by amongst the barrage of metaphoric artillery. At first, the allegoric lingo seems plausible and even intriguing. For all we know they could be talking in some sort of sophisticated code that is purposefully being used to evade corporate sabotage. So we wade through the wave after wave of meetings and conversations. However once you start nearing the middle of this film it felt almost a flashback to school days, where you happen to be the uncool outcast that just did not know the lingo. However at that point most people are probably still in it, waiting for that conversation or point in the story which would help everything fall into place and make sense. The time ticks away and it seems like the proverbial "other shoe" that we have been waiting for never falls.

There are a few sex scenes peppered into the thin plot, but the purpose behind most of the encounters are seem like nothing more than a ploy to keep the viewers interest. As I sifted through numerous conversations, and the couple of rendezvous for driving purpose, none were to be found. Amongst the parade of characters that we ran into, most seem about as unsure about the plot as they did about the character/tropes they were portraying. Many of the performances had disassociated inflections and awkward pauses which never quite fit into a believable interaction. Which could be partly due to faults in edit pacing. The only actor throughout the film who managed to convince ably inhabit her character was the "Chief of the Theory." Samantha Morton's scene gleamed as though she polished all aspects of her lines to perfectly reflect back a true visage of her character. Her conversation with the main character Packer was one of the few scenes where the raw gems in David Cronenberg screenplay were most visible. Part of the reason I was looking forward to seeing this film was the basic concept and the abundance of rather good actors listed in the cast.

However overall it was a disappointing 109 minutes that left me with moments of "I have no ideas how to feel about this." The reviews by both critics and viewers seems equally mixed. If this film worked for some, then I am happy for them because I wanted to like this movie. But this film sadly felt like the single black line painted on a clean white canvas, which is hung up and revered as a work of genius by some. But to be perfectly honest I felt like it might just be over my, like most's, head. The writing was experimental and complex but failed to stand from what I saw. Does it have possibility for true moments of genius? Sure. But did it fully live up to the potential of its concepts and devices, which were meant to set it apart ( in a good way)? I do not think so. This might be due to the adaptation of the novel, screenplay, the director, the actors, or maybe a combination of all of this.

-Nikki C.